tv [untitled] June 17, 2013 5:30am-6:01am PDT
>> if we wanted to make changes can we make the changes in the budget. my other questions is seems to me if we want to make changes we figure out how much is in one column so all the money that is being flexed or the fund balance money is in the general fund. so the program questions to me would that i would want answered are what are we doing and what
resources are we deploying to i'd the k c issue how is it integrated 0 into the a n g issues. by the way, i think that's an interesting example the k c money we're proposing to do something different in 2014 this and that in 2013. i want to know as a mechanic question and compliance question is for us to be told when we get to that, you know, in my mind i think the only thing we need to vote on to change if we still follow this process if we want to change the fund balance column. so if somebody can gept that
clarified before technique. >> the general fund - the money that's being swept is in the general fund. so if we put those into general uses the general fund goes down. the point is this is someone else's priority. this is the legislature saying here's all the little programs you must spined money on whether or not i think it's important. the whole local control facility is you put the money toward your priorities. there might be a priority that we're addressing but i don't know that meg around with the tier 3 people is going to get us
there. i don't want to get lost in the weeds. but i would like to ask is if board members have speck questions about why are we spending money on this and that let's get to the meeting on tuesday so we know why there's $50 in this column rather than a thousand. the question i want to ask is remember in many cases the categorical format does tell you how to spend it. i'm presuming because we have a higher priority to do something a little bit differently that might not be compliant.
entire - i believe if that would have to be here by the district to resolve >> so commissioner first item i'm taking the place of crying chris because he's with his children. there's one correction to the resolution. which is on page 16 item number one. where it says now therefore the board of education does hereby resolve the order as follows: the board herb electives is
special tax for fiscal years 2013 to 2014. in lieu of 2012, 2013 >> if i don't hear any observation that's what we'll be considering. so >> the subject matter is a resolution of the board of education of the san francisco unified school district elective you didn't go the special tax within the community district number 90 dash r for fiscal year 2013 through 2014 and i might add that is required as a condition of a mellow reduce parcel tax.
>> i it out we were going to be reading all those articles i was watching my farther movie. i apologize for the momentary lapse >> okay. are there any there are no speakers any comments on board? >> no okay roll call please. thank you (calling names) >> okay. thank you very much. you acquitted the gentleman very
well. item m monopoly and item n. item o we're going to vote on the consent calendar that was move forward and seconded on item s. roll call please. thank you (calling names) >> thank you. okay item p is consent calendar severed the only two were severed by me k 40 and 41. i simply wanted to make the point that there's a left leg loophole here. so k 40 was amended $275,000
were amended for the last two weeks of the school when there's no students present. we're now xrauf u approve this expenditure retro actively. there's no way you can see we're having to action. so the board is really trying to - introduced a lot of scrutiny of retro active spending. it bothers me it's easily done and unless you read it carefully you wouldn't know you were voted on a retro active issue.
i'm highlighting this if we can put our heads together so this loophole can be closed this is adviseable. roll call a on 40 and 41 (calling names) >> now we get to item q on the first reading can i hear a motion to move. >> so moved. >> we can discuss the budget on first reading. so we're going to going to engage in a discussion this evening. i understand there is a brief
are going to speak to a few slides but he's going to get us start. good evening commissioners we're here to present for first reading the recommended budget. we'll start by returning once again to our goals as a school district around assess achievement and get ability that will get us to our core goal for student success. on the next slide slide 3 you see a summary of our emerging priorities the strategic priorities. we've identified and clarified and brought a deeper understanding.
but just to review a few here around those we think will get us at our goal for student success. one is the recreational core around the english arts and math 3 k to 12. that forms the core of our work. within there we've really gone to or not ourselves to science engineering and mathematics across the grades as well and to lead the work as well. it's been an ongoing process to target the literacy practices. and diagnosising the results.
we want to meet the requirement. you've heard in numerous occasions we'll continue to emphasize the disabilities and receiving destruction in the least restrict active environment. we'll villaraigosa a robust calendar we have got a lot of work to do. we've been here on a couple of events and we've drafted a safe plan so though the
disproportionate immaterial we're doing our best to disrupt of proportional rate. we want to think about our center office departments to city hall's. what does it look like to all schools of support. and we may take a look at schools to try to help them engage in improvements. we'll do the tier levels look like. we move toward the tier was a model of support. that includes a curriculum and meets the design needs of our students. none of this is possible without
building a core system. we're excited about our work we're looking forward to bring this to the school and see a much broad level of opportunities to everyone. and to track all of our work we need a robust data system. that's been a big push to make sure we have the s i f system that, track the interventions. we need to remain advocates for the severe under funding of our schools before we need to actually satisfy our core
numbers. we allocate resources based on on academic needs in those economic times. how do we make sure that we're being strategic when we invest our resources and not to invest in strategies that don't have evidence of impact that don't show results and not data based. to be sure that the long-term and short-term decisions we make in the scalds. the budget development as a whole to make sure we retain our sovereignty. we want to take care of our budget concerns at the site level and district level.
. so we know that the commissioners even though you you might not have seen evidence of us listening to you as closely over the years your observations and the correctiri over the years hopefully, you'll see some of the aspects. he know that's not there yet. we'll probably never have a perfect document but we're trying to not to use a bad acronym accurately improving our budget material.
we've split up some of the information into two volumes so the first volume of the book their labeled volume one and two and by the way, although we've protruded the information it's on the website. for the members of the community that point to look through this documents. the first document is the county budget and a narrative section. it also includes central office and division budget summaries. the second volume has the site budget education site. our pre k and elementary and k-8 and middle high school and court schools. i think all the commissioners have versions that are tabbed so
you can flip through to find the information you're most interested in. the two years comparison between the 12, 13 budget and the proposed budget ftes for next week. a couple of caveats especially to the site budgets. we've noticed something this was produced and came together last week. we're noticing some things that need to be clarified and we'll flag this for the second reading. but as your reviewing the documents commissioners we're anticipating you'll be coming across those observations. one important thing is there's been a different approach to budgeting for the site based
special education staff. and in the past those who have appeared in the site or budgets and because we want to - we think it's adviseable and will lead to better results those have on consolidated into a central budget. it has the appearance of showing the reductions from the site budgets and that's
support services. and a suggestion that we got from president norton which we'll try to incorporate too is to have a summer of the organizational shifts so if there are things that were budgeted in a certainty way but is being budgeted in a different resource we'll try to give you a summary of those kinds of changes. we have some of the detailed summit pages that have to scale issues. so the y axis is not stated with the level of detail terms of the
increments we'll adjust that to the second reading. and that's just an issue with getting the right level of provision among the different tick marks on the left hand axis. we're going to fix that for second reading. if anyone has questions we'll clarify as needed. so on slide 7 this is a list of the and probably not an exhaust list but a list of some of the funding priorities that in the senate teams with the decisions with the superintendents that we've been trying to find the right balance of funding.
we won't go through those one by one but there's a fairly rofbtd issue we're trying to address. we've made a lot of process on most of these and but it is still a situation where we don't have the ideal level of funding to do what we would consider ideal or even adequate on all of these priorities. >> so to lend an example where you see multiple teetered supports on the school staffing city hall supports it might not be a fully implemented plan there's a reserve on the additional staff. so the things like access to the listcy code or an intervention
teacher maybe part the improvement effort. for example, face is listed there to implement the plan. there's some partial funding you moving forward. >> so at this point, we're going to share a little bit of information and i think we can go through this fairly quickly. this is not the first time you have seen this information. but the next few pages of the presentation has to do with the state budget the context in which we're developing the recommend budget. so the governor's budget which appears now to have result in an
agreement those figures show that. actually there's one mistake on there it's the mandate block grant it's 50 million. so the most significant piece of this the lc f is going to be implemented so the funding of $2.1 billion will be we think will be directed inform the first year >> i'm going to keep going. on page 89 it is really important for i know the commissioners all realize this it's important for the community to realize this that even though this is good news especially